曝光臺 注意防騙 網曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

PRR 2009 79 Chapter 7: Environment
7.3.5 The figures in Figure 94 contain inevitably margins of uncertainty. For instance, the great
circle distance used for the calculation of the inefficiencies in the horizontal flight path
may not always correspond to the user preferred profile which also considers factors such
as wind or route charges.
7.3.6 The development of a “fuel efficiency indicator” based on a comparison of actual fuel
burn with fuel burn needed for the user preferred 4-D trajectory would be an important
ANS-related performance indicator as it would also consider wind optimised routing and
user preferences and work should be facilitated in this direction by SESAR.
7.3.7 Such an indicator would require more precise information on factors such as weather
conditions, aircraft weight, aircraft engines and, above all, a precise definition of the user
preferred trajectory. A more exact estimation of the ANS contribution would require
advancements in ATM performance databases (weather, user preference, optimum speed
etc) and work needs to be carried out to explore the most efficient way to collect and
process such information.
Estimated inefficiency actionable by ANS Fuel/ flight Fuel Total CO2 total %
Estimated avg. within European airspace 4.5 t 42Mt 133 Mt 100%
Horizontal en-route flight path 163 kg 1.5Mt 4.8 Mt 3.6%
Vertical en-route flight profile 25 kg 0.2Mt 0.7 Mt 0.6%
Airborne terminal 51 kg 0.5Mt 1.5 Mt 1.1%
Taxi-out phase 32 kg 0.3Mt 0.9 Mt 0.7%
Total 271 kg  2.5Mt  8.0 Mt  6%
Figure 94: Share of CO2 emissions actionable by ANS in 2009
7.3.8 The estimated average fuel efficiency is estimated to be close to 94% which means that
ANS can only have an impact on some 6% of total fuel burn.
7.3.9 The share of CO2 emissions actionable by ANS is estimated to be around 6% of total
aviation related emissions. This corresponds to approximately 0.2% of total CO2
emissions in Europe (6% x 3.5% ≈ 0.2%)
Horizontal enroute
flight
path
3.6%
Vertical enroute
flight
profile
0.6%
Airborne
terminal
1.1%
Taxi-out phase
0.7%
Estimated average
fuel efficiency
94%
6%
Source: PRC analysis
Figure 95: ANS fuel efficiency
PRR 2009 80 Chapter 7: Environment
7.3.10 Although the share of CO2 emissions actionable by ANS is comparatively small, in the
absence of capacity or technological improvements, ANS-related inefficiencies are likely
to grow in absolute terms with demand. Maintaining or improving the same level of ANS
service quality while absorbing projected demand increases over the next 20 years will be
challenging.
7.3.11 The horizontal en-route flight path is the main component (3.6%), followed by airborne
delays in the terminal area (terminal holdings) which are estimated to be around 1.1%.
The horizontal en-route flight path is addressed in more detail in Chapter 5 and ANSrelated
inefficiencies at airports are addressed in more detail in Chapter 6.
ANS RELATED INIATIVES TO IMPROVE FUEL EFFICIENCY
7.3.12 The ANS-related impact on climate is closely linked to operational performance which is
largely driven by inefficiencies in the four dimensional trajectory and associated fuel
burn. Figure 94 shows that there is scope for improvement in the horizontal flight path
(route network design) but also in the management of any non-optimal aspects of the
flight trajectory (e.g. where delays are taken).
7.3.13 Improved route network: Most of the additional fuel burn on which ANS can have an
impact relates to the horizontal flight path en-route and hence to the route network design
(see Figure 94).
7.3.14 The improvement of the European route network is a Pan-European issue and for this
reason one of the European Union wide performance targets within the SES II
performance scheme should be the development of an improvement plan for the Pan-
European network in collaboration with States/FABs.
7.3.15 Although Figure 93 shows that a significant portion of flights to/from Europe are within
European airspace (1/3), there is a need for wider collaboration. Project like the Atlantic
Interoperability Initiative to Reduce Emissions (AIRE) should be pursued.
7.3.16 Improved trajectory management: A large part of ANS related inefficiencies are the result
of imbalances between demand and available capacity, coupled with the need to provide
sequencing and safe separation.
7.3.17 While ANS is not always the root cause of those inefficiencies (weather, airport
scheduling, noise restrictions, etc.), the way the inefficiencies are managed and
distributed along the various phases of flight has clearly an impact on the environment in
　
中國航空網 www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Performance Review Report 2009(59)